Heresy within Christianity

[Yehren]

Those professing Christianity who are mixing faith with good works in order to be justified before God.

James 2 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?

 

[mailmandan]

Those professing Christianity who are mixing faith with good works in order to be justified before God.

Romans 4:2 For if Abraham was justified (accounted as righteous) by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it (faith, not works) was accounted to him for righteousness. 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works.

 

[Jay Ross]

I certainly don't demonstrate a Darwinian evolutionary understanding, because I don't believe that physical death entered the world before Adam. Evolution involves death because natural selection and survival of the species depends on less fit species dying out and strong species surviving. Of course this is happening in the present day with many species becoming extinct, but no species became extinct before Adam because none of the animals died.

But that is what your theory is based on, even if you do not recognize that that is what you are doing, i.e. your thinking is that they could not have known that back then, but today we are much more intelligent and therefore can know about it now.
That is applying the logic of the Darwinian evolutionary theory to justify your thinking.

Shalom

 

[Jay Ross]

Arguing that the Bible is wrong doesn't seem like a sound argument to me.

I am not arguing that the original source Hebrew text is wrong. What I am suggesting is that the scholarship in the translations have got it wrong.

If you deny what is plainly there, to get the result you want, isn't that a revelation for you?

That is the thing, I am not denying what is plainly there in the Hebraic texts, but I am stating that the expressed context of the English translation does not contain the same message content as the original Hebraic Text in this case.

KJV
Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Douay
Genesis 2:16 And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat:
17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

NIV
Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

NKJV
Genesis 2:16 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

Why not just take it as it is?

See above. Can you think of even one version of scripture that supports your doctrine?

The above English translations do not support the way I am seeing as to how the above two verses should be translated, but logically, even though the quoted translation all agree, it does not rule out the argument that they all do not contain the same message content as the Hebraic texts.

As I have previously presented, the "second death" outcome because of sin was a known concept even before the flood, as well as after the flood.

All that 2:27 tells us is that if Adam sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, then he would die the death for sin that forgiveness was not requested of.

It seems to me that both you and Paul are arguing from the same understanding position as each other. That is you are arguing out of both of your positions of ignorance.

Shalom

 

[Yehren]

I am not arguing that the original source Hebrew text is wrong. What I am suggesting is that the scholarship in the translations have got it wrong.

Fair enough. But given the level of scholarship involved in all the existing translations, I don't see much reason to buy your dissenting view.

 

[Jay Ross]

Fair enough. But given the level of scholarship involved in all the existing translations, I don't see much reason to buy your dissenting view.

But it takes a lot for people to stop believing in a lemon because of the car manufacturer's achievements with past cars. Likewise scholarship does not necessarily lead to good translations of the original text. Consider Chinese's English translations. The Chinese texts is clear, but the English translation of that Chinese text often is as clear as mud and very confusing. The measure of a good translation from one language to another is found when the precise message content of the original text is also clearly conveyed into another language such that the reader of the translation does come to the same understanding of the original text as the author who penned it.

In our case with the translations of the source texts of God's word recorded in scripture, the translations are not always perfect and the reader of the translations must accept the translations with blind faith, such that we have the blind leading the blind. As Jesus said, when that occurs, both will fall into the "pit" when the blind "scholar" leads the blind person with whatever limited abilities the blind scholar has.

 

[Yehren]

But it takes a lot for people to stop believing in a lemon because of the car manufacturer's achievements with past cars. Likewise scholarship does not necessarily lead to good translations of the original text. Consider Chinese's English translations. The Chinese texts is clear, but the English translation of that Chinese text often is as clear as mud and very confusing. The measure of a good translation from one language to another is found when the precise message content of the original text is also clearly conveyed into another language such that the reader of the translation does come to the same understanding of the original text as the author who penned it.

In our case with the translations of the source texts of God's word recorded in scripture, the translations are not always perfect and the reader of the translations must accept the translations with blind faith, such that we have the blind leading the blind. As Jesus said, when that occurs, both will fall into the "pit" when the blind "scholar" leads the blind person with whatever limited abilities the blind scholar has.

I'm just pointing out that all those other scholars have more credibility than a dissenter who hasn't actually done the translations.

 

[Paul Christensen]

James 2 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?

What James is talking about is that if a person says that they have faith (in other words, professes Christianity), he needs to justify his faith through what he does. This is not justification by faith, but a demonstration that he has faith in Christ. Therefore if a person who says he's a Christian but continues being a lying, thieving, blaspheming, adulterer at heart, then his professed faith is dead because he is not demonstrating being genuinely converted to Christ.

This is linked to Paul saying "Shall we continue in sin so that grace may abound? God forbid!"

 

[Paul Christensen]

But that is what your theory is based on, even if you do not recognize that that is what you are doing, i.e. your thinking is that they could not have known that back then, but today we are much more intelligent and therefore can know about it now.
That is applying the logic of the Darwinian evolutionary theory to justify your thinking.

Shalom

My view is based on what the Bible actually says in Romans and 2 Corinthians - that death came through Adam where it did not exist before. It was the direct result of Adam's disobedience to God and brought a curse into the world and death along with it. If death was not in the world before Adam, evolution could not have happened.

 

[Jay Ross]

My view is based on what the Bible actually says in Romans and 2 Corinthians - that death came through Adam where it did not exist before. It was the direct result of Adam's disobedience to God and brought a curse into the world and death along with it. If death was not in the world before Adam, evolution could not have happened.

This is true that that is what Paul wrote, but which death was he speaking of? Was it not the Second Death that Paul was referring too?

 

[Yehren]

What James is talking about is that if a person says that they have faith (in other words, professes Christianity), he needs to justify his faith through what he does. This is not justification by faith, but a demonstration that he has faith in Christ.

It is, according to God, justification by works. "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith only."

I know people say that if one has faith, then works will follow. But it remains true that one is justified by works, as God says.

 

[Yehren]

My view is based on what the Bible actually says in Romans and 2 Corinthians - that death came through Adam where it did not exist before.

As you know, God told Adam that he would die the day he ate from the tree. Adam eats from the tree, and lives on physically for many years thereafter. If God tells the truth, the death that Adam brought into the world was not a physical death.

No way to dodge it.

 

[mjrhealth]

As you know, God told Adam that he would die the day he ate from the tree. Adam eats from the tree, and lives on physically for many years thereafter. If God tells the truth, the death that Adam brought into the world was not a physical death.

No way to dodge it.

He dies spiritually in that HE / we became seperated from God, but it also led to corruption which bought in Physical death, which is why over time we have lived shorter lives 70 eras is the supposed. But this topic has nothing to do with our salvation but that by one man sin enterd into the world, and by one man came salvation.

 

[Paul Christensen]

This is true that that is what Paul wrote, but which death was he speaking of? Was it not the Second Death that Paul was referring too?

Not just spiritual death, because God did not reveal the concept of spiritual death when He inspired Moses to write Genesis. All that God told him was that death entered the world with Adam's disobedience, and Moses would have seen that as physical death.

It was not until Jesus, through the Holy Spirit revealed to Paul that unconverted people are dead in their sins while still alive. Moses didn't know that. Right through the Old Testament when people came under the punishment of God, they lost their physical lives. That was what God's punishment for sin under the Old Covenant.

We tend to look at Genesis through our New Testament telescope and assume that Adam and Eve knew they when they ate the fruit they would die spiritually. We know it because it was revealed to Paul. But physical death and decay throughout all creation entered the world, and Adam had the sentence of death as soon as he disobeyed and spent the rest of his life 'on death row" for around 900 years until he actually died.

 

[Paul Christensen]

It is, according to God, justification by works. "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith only."

I know people say that if one has faith, then works will follow. But it remains true that one is justified by works, as God says.

So you are saying that Paul was not inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote that we are justified by faith alone in Christ apart from works, but James was when he wrote that without works faith is dead?

Or if the Holy Spirit inspired both Paul and James, seeing that both their letters are accepted as holy inspired Scripture, are you saying that the Holy Spirit is contradicting Himself?

 

[Yehren]

He dies spiritually in that HE / we became seperated from God, but it also led to corruption which bought in Physical death

That's something some men added to God's word to make it more acceptable to them. It's not in scripture.

 

[Yehren]

Not just spiritual death, because God did not reveal the concept of spiritual death when He inspired Moses to write Genesis. All that God told him was that death entered the world with Adam's disobedience, and Moses would have seen that as physical death.

No,obviously, if Moses was told it was physical death, he clearly would not have written what we see in Genesis. God tells Adam he will die that day, but Adam lives on physically for many years. Clearly, Moses knew it was not a physical death, since that would require God to not tell the truth.

 

[Paul Christensen]

As you know, God told Adam that he would die the day he ate from the tree. Adam eats from the tree, and lives on physically for many years thereafter. If God tells the truth, the death that Adam brought into the world was not a physical death.

No way to dodge it.

So, Paul was not inspired by the Holy Spirit when he said that death came into the world through the disobedience of Adam, and linked the resurrection of Christ and our future resurrection with the same death.

Paul says that the way that Christ was resurrected from the dead, we will be resurrected in the same way. So, are you saying that Christ was not resurrected in His flesh, but as a spirit, and we will just be resurrected in spirit and not in our flesh? You have to be consistent. If Paul is talking about spiritual death and then in the same verse he speaks of the resurrection, then you have to say that Christ was, and we will be, resurrected in spirit and our flesh will stay dead.

Is is the Holy Spirit correct when He inspired Paul to say that we all die because physical death came into the world through Adam's disobedience and Christ was physically resurrected from the dead, and so will we.

I wonder whether you are reading Genesis and Paul through the filter of your own dogmatic view that evolution is correct?

 

[Paul Christensen]

No,obviously, if Moses was told it was physical death, he clearly would not have written what we see in Genesis. God tells Adam he will die that day, but Adam lives on physically for many years. Clearly, Moses knew it was not a physical death, since that would require God to not tell the truth.

God did not say that Adam would die that day. God said just that he would die. You need to be accurate when you refer to Scripture. Adam died 900 years later, proving God's words true for him.

It is a concern that you would add to what God says in order to support your dogmatic evolutionary stance.

My dogmatic view is that if you believe in evolution, you don't believe the God of the Bible and what He says about how He created the world.

 

[Yehren]

So, Paul was not inspired by the Holy Spirit when he said that death came into the world through the disobedience of Adam, and linked the resurrection of Christ and our future resurrection with the same death.

I don't see how you could be confused by that. After all, Christ's death and resurrection didn't save us from physical death. We will all die someday. He saved us from a spiritual death, as Paul knew quite well. If it was a physical death that was taken from us, no follower of Jesus would die physically.